TMI Blog2019 (6) TMI 1511X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... est before issuance of the show cause notice, then in that case, show cause notice shall not be issued. There is no requirement to issue SCN - Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. - S.Tax Appeal No.78619 of 2018 - FINAL ORDER NO.75779/2019 - Dated:- 19-6-2019 - HON BLE MR. P.K.CHOUDHARY, MEMBER (JUDICIAL) Shri Ankit Kanodia, C.A. for Appellant Shri T. Mondal, Authorized Representative for the Respondent ORDER PER P.K.CHOUDHARY : The facts of the case in brief are that the appellant is registered under the category of Business Auxiliary Service and is engaged in organizing of travel and other business exhibitions in various States within the Territory of India. The appellant also got register ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ns were duly recorded in the Books of Account and the Audit Team pointed out the liability of payment of service tax under the Reverse Charge Mechanism (RCM) while going through the Books of Account only. It is his submission that the appellant assessee was under the bonafide belief that there was no service tax liability on the services received since the provider of services had not charged any service tax. The liability was under reverse charge mechanism and the appellant could know about this liability about only when the Audit Team pointed out. Therefore, they never disputed the liability and immediately paid the entire amount of service tax as calculated along with the applicable interest, which was also a substantial amount. It is hi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sel relied upon the decision of this Tribunal in the case of South India Paper Mills Ltd. v. C.C.E. S.T. reported in 2016-TIOL-2294- CESTAT-BANG wherein in the similar circumstances, the penalty under Section 78 of the Finance Act was dropped in toto. He also relied upon the following case laws : (i) Intercontinental Consultants Technocrats Pvt. Ltd. v. U.O.I. [2013 (29) S.T.R. 9 (Del.)] (ii) Amit Sales v. C.C.E. [2009 (13) S.T.R. 165 (Tri.-Del.)] (iii) Jindal Saw Ltd. (IPU) v. C.C.E. [2013 (30) S.T.R. 490 (Tri.- Ahmd.)] (iv) C.S.T., Bangalore v. Motor World [2012 (27) S.T.R. 225 (Kar.)] (v) Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd. v. C.C.E., Mumbai-II [2012 (25) S.T.R. 161 (Tri.-Mumbai)] (vi) C.C.E. S. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
